Middle East – Dakota Voicehttp://www.dakotavoice.com
Exposing the pernicious lieThu, 04 Sep 2014 11:52:16 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.6.1Youths’ support for Ron Paul is misplacedhttp://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/12/youths-support-for-ron-paul-is-misplaced/
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/12/youths-support-for-ron-paul-is-misplaced/#commentsSat, 31 Dec 2011 07:03:52 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=63096In the 20-plus years that I have worked as a conservative activist, I've spoken on almost 200 university campuses -- usually to Republican and conservative groups. Over time, I have observed changes in attitude among many young Republicans -- and I believe these shifts help explain the rise of Ron Paul. Where young Republicans once had a sense of purpose and traditional values, now many don't want to hear about "values" such as marriage, life, or family--just talk about the economy. ]]>

Star Parker

In the 20-plus years that I have worked as a conservative activist, I’ve spoken on almost 200 university campuses — usually to Republican and conservative groups.

Over time, I have observed changes in attitude among many young Republicans — and I believe these shifts help explain the rise of Ron Paul.

When I first started lecturing early in the 1990s, leading heroes of Republican youth were Ronald Reagan and William F. Buckley Jr.

Individual freedom, respect for constitutional limitations on government and traditional values was the message. There was a sense of purpose. America was a “shining city on a hill,” as Reagan so often quoted the Puritan pilgrim John Winthrop.

Now, increasing numbers of my campus hosts ask that I not talk about “values.” Leave out the stuff about marriage, family and abortion, please, and just talk about the economy.

The materialism and moral relativism that created our left-wing culture is now infecting our youth on the right. Young Republicans may be pushing back on government, but too often their motivation is like that of their left-wing contemporaries: a sense of entitlement and a desire to claim rights, with little interest in corresponding personal responsibilities.

Photo credit: R. DeYoung

David Yepsen, who directs the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University Carbondale, recently described Ron Paul’s success as a “resurgence of the libertarian and isolationist wings of the Republican Party,” resulting from “hard times and unpopular wars.”

But overlooked is the important role of youth.

Among registered Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who support Paul, 67 percent are under age 34. Among supporters for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, such youths account for 37 percent and 20 percent, respectively.

This youthful surge has helped Paul’s very successful fundraising, heavily driven by small contributions via the Internet. Among Republicans who’ve raised the most funds, Paul got 48 percent of his support from small donors. For Romney and Rick Perry, the shares were 10 percent and 4 percent.

And youth have been critical in Paul’s ground organization. I watched this play out when Paul won the straw poll at the Values Voter Summit in Washington, where I spoke last October.

Busloads of youthful Paul supporters arrived just to hear his speech and to pay and register so that they could vote. They put him over the top.

They have little interest in a Reagan-like “shining city on a hill” message, or talk about a threatening “evil empire” abroad.

To the contrary, they are excited by the “leave me alone” candidate who thinks the rest of the world is not our business. Apparently, they share Paul’s indifference to the looming threat of a nuclear Iran or the almost complete absence of freedom in most Islamic nations.

Chicago Sun-Times columnist Steve Huntley reports that, by one estimate, more than 200,000 persecuted Coptic Christians will have left Egypt by year’s end. He reports a dramatic drop in the presence of Christians throughout the Middle East. Bethlehem’s Christian population is now a third of what it was 35 years ago.

The only exception is Israel, where Christians have more than quadrupled since 1948. But Paul sees no distinction between Israel and its neighbors, nor does he think Americans should care.

Self-centered materialism, which leads our youth to support such indifference to global realities, is also driving the collapse of the American family.

Census Bureau statistics show that today 20 percent of Americans ages 18 to 29 are married. Fifty years ago, 59 percent of them were.

In his farewell speech, Reagan issued a warning to the nation: “Are we doing a good enough job teaching our children what America is and what she represents in the long history of the world?”

I doubt that Ron Paul’s vision of America is what Reagan had in mind.

Star Parker is president of the Coalition on Urban Renewal & Education and author of the new book White Ghetto: How Middle Class America Reflects Inner City Decay. Prior to her involvement in social activism, Star Parker was a single welfare mother in Los Angeles, California. After receiving Christ, Star returned to college, received a BS degree in marketing and launched an urban Christian magazine.

After the most recent GOP presidential debate, reasonable people can disagree as to who came out on top. It was abundantly clear, however, who was smothered beneath the pile.

As Ron Paul waxed naïve from his perch in Sioux City, Iowa, on issues ranging from foreign policy to judicial activism, one could almost hear his campaign bus tires deflate. Although some polls indicate that Mr. Paul has surged in Iowa, most national polls suggest that, beyond a relatively fixed throng of blindly devoted “Paulbots,” support for the eccentric Texas lawmaker has a concrete ceiling.

Mr. Paul did himself no favors during the debate. Afterward, former Iowa House Speaker Christopher C. Rants blogged, “Ron Paul finally lit a match after dousing himself with gasoline.”

Putting aside for a moment Mr. Paul’s leftist policies on a variety of social issues ranging from his unwavering support for newfangled “gay rights” – to include open homosexuality in the military – to advocacy for across-the-board legalization of illicit drugs, Mr. Paul demonstrated that he has a dangerous, fundamental misunderstanding of the threat posed to every American citizen by radical Islam. This alone disqualifies him for serious consideration as our future Commander-in-Chief.

During the debate, moderator Bret Baier asked Mr. Paul: “Many Middle East experts now say Iran may be less than one year away from getting a nuclear weapon. … Even if you had solid intelligence that Iran was in fact going to get a nuclear weapon, President Paul would remove the U.S. sanctions on Iran – including those added by the Obama administration. So, to be clear, GOP nominee Paul would be running left of President Obama on Iran?”

Mr. Paul responded: “But I’d be running with the American people because it would be a much better policy.” (The only American people running with this policy risk running the rest of us off a cliff.)

He went on to reject a U.N. agency report that indicates Iran is within months of developing nuclear weaponry, calling it “war propaganda.” He then spouted the same anti-American talking points we’ve come to expect from the hard-left “progressive” establishment, blaming America for Iran’s efforts to go nuclear.

In defense of Islamic terrorists, not unlike those responsible for Sept. 11, Mr. Paul said, “Yeah, there are some radicals, but they don’t come here to kill us because we’re free and prosperous. … They come here and want to do us harm because we’re bombing them.

“I don’t want Iran to have a nuclear weapon,” he continued, all the while demonstrating to everyone watching that a President Paul would be unwilling to lift a finger to prevent it.

His pacifist ruminations prompted fellow presidential candidate Michele Bachmann to respond: “With all due respect to Ron Paul, I think I have never heard a more dangerous answer for American security than the one that we just heard from Ron Paul. … I’ll tell you the reason why, the reason why I would say that is because we know without a shadow of a doubt that Iran will take a nuclear weapon, they will use it to wipe our ally Israel off the face of the map, and they stated they will use it against the United States of America. Look no further than the Iranian constitution, which states unequivocally that their mission is to extend jihad across the world and eventually to set up a worldwide caliphate. We would be fools to ignore their purpose and their plan.”

Mr. Paul evidently is one of those fools. Iran is today’s version of Nazi Germany, and Mr. Paul’s obtuse strategy of reckless inaction affords him the dubious title of this generation’s Neville Chamberlain. Like Chamberlain’s fruitless appeasement, Mr. Paul’s similar strategy simply feeds the insatiable beast.

Don’t get me wrong. I personally like Ron Paul. He’s that affable – if not a little “zany” – uncle who has the whole family on edge at Thanksgiving. “Oh boy; what’s Uncle Ronny gonna say next?”

Still, you wouldn’t give Uncle Ronny the carving knife for the turkey, much less the keys to the Oval Office.

Mr. Paul is many things, but conservative is not one of them. He’s a died-in-the-wool libertarian. That’s one part conservative, two parts anarchist.

Ronald Reagan often spoke of a “three-legged stool” that undergirds true conservatism. The legs are represented by strong free-market economic principles, a strong national defense and strong social values. For the stool to remain upright, it must be supported by all three legs. If you snap off even one leg, the stool collapses under its own weight.

Mr. Paul is relatively conservative from an economic standpoint, but in true libertarian form, has snapped off the legs of national defense and social values.

The libertarian is a strange and rare little animal – a bit like the woolly flying squirrel. It spends its days erratically darting to-and-fro atop this teetering, one-legged stool in a futile effort to keep it from toppling. America witnessed Ron Paul doing this squirrelly libertarian tango Thursday night. Cute but unstable.

Ron Paul never had a chance; but now, with the possible exception of his most committed devotees, I suspect most people will finally admit it. Regardless of what happens in Iowa, the Paul engine has run out of steam. During the debate it pulled into the station and released its final wheeze right alongside the Cain Train.

]]>http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/12/ron-paul-is-dangerous/feed/6Occupy Chicago Crowd Seeks Destruction of Israelhttp://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/10/occupy-chicago-crowd-seeks-destruction-of-israel/
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/10/occupy-chicago-crowd-seeks-destruction-of-israel/#commentsFri, 14 Oct 2011 19:34:06 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=60001I love it when Marxists stop pretending and show us how they really feel. Like this "Occupy Chicago" occupationist gathering where flyers were distributed calling for the destruction of our ally Israel, as well as our defeat by the terrorists and other Islamic militants in Afghanistan and Iraq. ]]>

Flyer distributed by a group euphemistically called Jewish Voice for Peace

I love it when Marxists stop pretending and show us how they really feel.

Like this “Occupy Chicago” occupationist gathering where flyers were distributed calling for the destruction of our ally Israel, as well as our defeat by the terrorists and other Islamic militants in Afghanistan and Iraq.

This is why I just don’t buy it when (more restrained) Leftists claim they love America, that their anti-American trashing of the U.S. Constitution is “just a different interpretation,” that their hatred for my freedom is just “seeing things differently.”

I’ve been familiar with these hate-filled anti-American dirtbags for more than 30 years, and I know them for the snakes they are. Only a fool would think a rattlesnake is going to be nice and play well with you, and my mama didn’t raise a fool.

When Michele Bachmann was asked about a question asked in a previous debate (“How much of my own money should I be able to keep?”), she said that we need a completely different mindset in government–one that government is not the genius of our country, but the people. She said that what works are private sector solutions, and these are what will grow our economy.

One of the top-voted questions online was asked of Rick Santorum. It concerned right-to-work states and unionism, asking if the candidate would support a federal “Right to Work” law that allows all workers to choose whether or not to join a union. Santorum said that government workers should not be involved in unions and he would support legislation that restricted government workers from joining unions.

Gingrich was asked if he would extend unemployment benefits, to which he replied that such benefits should be tied to a training program that would become an investment in the individual to help them get a job. He said that it was wrong to give benefits to people for 99 weeks with no expectation in return. “People should not get money for doing nothing,” he concluded.

Huntsman was asked about taxpayer-funded incentives he provided for environmental projects, and how that was different from President Barack Obama’s largess extended to Solyndra. He said that we in America are divided economically, but said that we can move toward renewable energy. He said today the economics don’t work, and that we should look more closely at natural gas.

Herman Cain was asked about his 9-9-9 plan of a 9% corporate tax, a 9% flat tax and a 9% capital gains tax. He said we need to begin by throwing out the current complicated tax code, then replace it with his 9-9-9 plan. Cain said this would unleash our economy. Cain said Romney was still tied to the current tax code, but “that dog won’t hunt.”

Ron Paul was asked how he would restore the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Paul responded that he would veto any bill that violated the 10th Amendment. He said the federal government has no authority to run our schools or run our personal lives.

During an intermission, a popular Google question was reviewed, which asked how they would define “rich” with the largest block (44%) stating more than $1 million.

After the first break, Rick Perry and Mitt Romney were asked about Social Security. Romney made it clear that he believed in this bankrupt Ponzi scheme and would do whatever he could as president to keep it going. Perry also pointed out that Romney had forced the Massachusetts-equivalent of ObamaCare onto the people of his state. Romney defended his virtually identical socialized health care program by claiming that it was done at the state level, which apparently makes all the difference.

When Romney was asked if Barack Obama was a socialist, he dodged the question and simply said he wanted to see Obama gone from the presidency.

Herman Cain was asked one of the top YouTube questions: If he was going to eliminate a federal department, which would it be. He said before anything, he would eliminate the EPA because it is out of control and start over. Cain pointed out that the EPA’s plan to regulate dust illustrates that this agency has gone too far. Cain then said we should utilize the Chilean model for Social Security because Chile and 30 other countries have privatized their government retirement systems successfully using this method, and we should do.

Bachmann was asked one of the text questions from online, whether she would support states enforcing immigration laws where the federal government refuses to do so, and how she would square that with the Constitution. She said it was reprehensible that the Obama Administration had sued the state of Arizona for trying to do what he refused to do. She said as president she would enforce the nation’s immigration laws, and would also support a fence across our border to protect our national sovereignty. She said she also would not support taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal aliens or their children because this is a magnet to illegal aliens.

Gingrich was asked if he would promote and enforce E-Verify usage by employers to ensure they were not hiring illegal aliens. He said that we would do better if we privatized the system. He also asked what employers would object to in using the system. He said he agreed with Bachmann’s statements and said we should make English the official language of our nation. He said our visa system needs to be updated and improved to make it easier for people to come to our country legally.

Romney was asked about benefits for illegal aliens and Perry’s tuition discounts for illegal aliens. Romney said he could not sanction that, that it was wrong for a U.S. citizen from another state to pay more for college in Texas than a foreigner who was in Texas illegally.

Perry said he has worked hard to secure the border in Texas and supported Arizona’s illegal immigration law, but “I don’t think you have a heart” if someone opposes his tuition discount for illegal aliens. He said he still supports that program “greatly.”

Santorum has criticized Perry’s opposition to a border fence, and was asked about his opinion of Perry. Santorum asked Perry why we were subsidizing illegal aliens to go to college, and why illegal aliens are being given preferential treatment in Texas. Santorum said he did believe Perry was soft on illegal immigration, as well as government health care, since he once supported a government health care plan shared with Mexico.

Ron Paul was asked about a statement he made recently about a border fence “keeping Americans in” who might for some reason want to leave the country (implying that an American border fence to keep invaders out is equivalent to something like the Soviet Union’s Iron Curtain). Paul said that our government has made it difficult in this economy and people might want to leave.

On foreign policy, online questions revealed that relations with Israel are important to voters. A person from New Jersey asked about how Romney would deal with threats Israel faces in the Middle East. He replied that there should be no “space” or division between us and our allies, and that President Obama had gone about this issue all wrong. He pointed out that Obama had shown disrespect toward Israel and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu even as Netanyahu came to visit our country. Romney said it was unacceptable for Iran to become a nuclear power.

Cain was asked how he would respond to a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state. He said he believed in peace through strength, and that this current administration had not made it clear where we stand on this issue. Cain said he would make it clear to all parties in the world that “If you mess with Israel, you mess with the United States.” He said that if it was clear to the world that we stood by Israel, her enemies might think twice before moving against her.

Perry was asked what he would do if Pakistan lost control of its nuclear weapons at the hands of the Taliban. He said that this administration had not done enough to build relationships in that area of the world, which would be critical to any actions we needed to take. He said we should also maintain our friendship with India, something we had not done under the Obama Administration when we declined weapons sales to that nation.

Bachmann was asked about her statement that the so-called “separation of church and state” is a myth. She said that Thomas Jefferson made it clear that there was not to be a national church in the United States, and this is what he meant in his taken-out-of-context letter to the Danbury Baptists. She said that whether our religious expression takes place in a public school or public building, we should all have the freedom to express our religious beliefs.

Santorum was asked a question via video from a homosexual soldier about homosexual behavior in the military. Santorum said that homosexual activists are seeking to inject social policy into the military while the military has one job: to defend our country in the most efficient manner possible, and this agenda undermines their ability. Santorum said that we’re playing social experimentation with our military and this is tragic; he said he would re-institute the 235-year old ban against homosexual behavior in the military if he were president.

A video question on ObamaCare came from an individual with health problems and he asked whether the candidates would repeal the portion of ObamaCare that allows adult children to stay on their parent’s insurance policy until they are 26 years old. Huntsman said a key problem with health care is that health care and plans are unaffordable, and that government needs to make them more affordable.

Bachmann was asked about a statement she made after the last debate about Perry’s attempt to mandate Gardasil vaccinations for young girls, and a story she repeated from a woman who said her daughter had suffered “mental retardation” after being vaccinated. Bachmann reiterated that she was repeating what the woman had told her, and that many problems with the drug have been documented. She said Perry essentially gave parental rights to a drug company, and this was wrong.

There were a few more softball questions for each of the candidates at the end, but you can watch the video for those. Speaking of videos, I’ll have the video of the full debate up as soon as I can. I would already have about an hour of it uploaded and YouTube-ready if the, um, people at YouTube weren’t constantly telling me I have access to upload huge video clips, then taking it away, then giving it back, then taking it away again. It really stinks to spend a half an hour or more editing and uploading video, only to find out “too big” and you get to re-edit at a shorter length and re-upload. Oh well. You get what you pay for, right? Stand by for the video parts…

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Part 8

Part 9

Part 10

Part 11 (Final Part)

]]>http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/09/florida-fox-news-gop-debate-with-video/feed/14Obama’s ‘Attack Watch’ not for the Strong of Mindhttp://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/09/obama%e2%80%99s-attack-watch-not-for-the-strong-of-mind/
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/09/obama%e2%80%99s-attack-watch-not-for-the-strong-of-mind/#commentsThu, 15 Sep 2011 11:36:57 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=59040As we dive into the campaign season leading up to the long, long awaited 2012 election, we are seeing an increasingly desperate communist Left looking to keep Barack Obama in the White House. As we have already seen, there is no lie brazen enough that Obama and other members of the communist Democrat party are unwilling to tell it with a straight face. So, it is no surprise that we now have a website that looks like some kind of lying propaganda machine resurrected from the old Soviet Unionand updated with modern technology. Welcome to Attack Watch.]]>Listen to the author read this article

Gina Miller

As we dive into the campaign season leading up to the long, long awaited 2012 election, we are seeing an increasingly desperate communist Left looking to keep Barack Obama in the White House. As we have already seen, there is no lie brazen enough that Obama and other members of the communist Democrat party are unwilling to tell it with a straight face.

So, it is no surprise that we now have a website that looks like some kind of lying propaganda machine resurrected from the old Soviet Union and updated with modern technology. The website, which was created by Obama for America is called Attack Watch, and it claims to be about fighting “attacks” and “smears” against Barack Obama. Readers are encouraged to sign up for the feeds and to report any “attack” or “smear” on Obama that they come across anywhere in the media, on the Internet, and even in emails—yes, in personal emails.

If you’re worried about the increasing negativity of the attacks on President Obama and his record, now’s your chance to fight back with the facts. Visit AttackWatch.com to learn the truth about frequent smears, track new attacks as they happen, and report false allegations you’ve seen or heard.

We’ve heard it all since 2008, from lies about the Affordable Care Act to false rumors that the Obama administration hasn’t been an ally to Israel. These aren’t just unfounded allegations about the President—they’re attempts to derail the momentum of this movement and undermine everything we’ve accomplished together in the last three years.

Oh, they had better believe we are most certainly hoping with all our might to derail the hell-born momentum and turn back all the “accomplishments” of the Obama administration!

When visiting the Attack Watch website, the reader, like Alice, is yanked down the rabbit hole and thrust into twisted adventures in Wonderland, where up is down, black is white and the truth is a lie. The discerning reader easily determines that what these people mean by “attacks” and “smears” is simply anyone telling the truth about the disaster for America that is called Barack Obama.

Since the site is just now getting started, there are only a handful of “attacks” listed with so-called “facts” that purport to debunk them. At the top, Glenn Beck is called out for his opinion that the Obama administration has betrayed Israel, one of our greatest allies. Now, let’s see about that.

“President Obama is a friend to Israel, despite unfounded claims to the contrary.”

Unfounded claims to the contrary? Is that so?

For “proof,” Attack Watch provides a few quotes, including one from Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak saying that he “can hardly remember a better period of support” for Israel than under the Obama administration. Yet, in an Associated Press news story from April 2010, the very same Ehud Barak is quoted as saying,

“But we also shouldn’t delude ourselves. The growing alienation between us and the United States is not good for the state of Israel.”

Boy, that’s a head-scratcher, isn’t it? U.S.support for Israel has never been better, and there’s a growing alienation between us?

So, what’s the reality here? Let us not forget the truth of Obama’s actions, which speak much louder than a strange sound bite from someone hoping to curry favor with the thuggish Obama administration.

Perhaps the Obama administration is also hoping we will all get a collective case of amnesia and forget to remember the ongoing horrific scandal of the Fast and Furious gunrunner project which has seen U.S.government-provided weapons used by Mexican drug gangs to kill our own border agents and many Mexican citizens. This is an abominable program that no doubt has its origins at the highest level in our government.

Here is yet another criminal scandal for which the Teflon Obama administration will probably not be held accountable, and which is a transparent scheme to tear down our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

“The point [of Fast and Furious] is to create a false idea—with false statistics to back it up—that American guns are the ‘problem’ and a large contributing factor to the animalistic violence near the Mexican border. The further purpose is to cause such violent chaos, which will spill over into the U.S.—as it has already—that American citizens and lawmakers will be duped and scared into believing that even more gun control legislation is necessary to curb the gun violence in Mexico and bleeding into America.

This is nothing more than yet another attempt by the communist Left to grab our guns. It is also one of the more despicable things I have ever seen from our government, and that’s saying a lot in light of the truly terrible things we have seen from Washington in recent years. The investigation into this matter could reveal that our own government and agencies conspired to use millions of taxpayer dollars to put guns in the hands of maniac drug gang members in Mexico, knowing full well that those guns would be used to kill Mexican and American citizens.”

“The Affordable Care Act promotes quality, affordable health coverage for all Americans, regardless of the industry they work in or their union status.”

It is amazing that anyone would still believe socialized medicine—which is what Obamacare is—is better than our current medical system, even with all the fraud that occurs in the government-run Medicare and Medicaid programs. Where in the world does socialized medicine result in “quality, affordable” health care for all people? In truth, there is nothing good that can come from the monstrous Obamacare legislation.

RedState lays it out nicely in a column titled, “Ten Ways ObamaCare will Kill You.” The points are that Obamacare will kill jobs, kill choice, kill innovation, inevitably result in rationing, cause taxes to skyrocket, kill fiscal responsibility, kill state government budgets by forcing higher Medicaid costs on states, kill the private sector health insurance industry, kill quality care from doctors by bureaucratizing the entire system and cutting quality to cut costs, and finally it will kill our freedom.

We can plainly see that Attack Watch is simply a new version of the Fight the Smears website, which has this Obama quote at the top of its page,

“What you won’t hear from this campaign or this party is the kind of politics that uses religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon—that sees our opponents not as competitors to challenge, but enemies to demonize.”

As I said, Obama and the Democrats have never met a lie they were afraid to tell.

Another item to note is that Attack Watch is using material from George Soros’ “nonprofit” Media Matters for America organization. It is certainly not news that Media Matters is a highly political tool of the communist Left which clearly violates the federal requirements for a 501(c)(3) entity, which is what Media Matters is.

According to the Internal Revenue Service’s regulations,

“To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization … may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.”

Oh, but, when has this administration and its minions in Media Matters ever let the law get in their way?

Now that I have given you an overview of this new communesque Obama website and refuted a few of its lies, any Obot out there can use the handy link to Attack Watch—which is included in the transcript of this broadcast at Dakota Voice—to report this radio commentary to the White House Gestapo Attack Watch.

Thank you, and good morning, comrades!

Gina Miller, a native of Texas, is a radio commentator. She also works with her husband installing and repairing residential irrigation systems and doing landscaping on the Mississippi Gulf Coast.

]]>http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/09/obama%e2%80%99s-attack-watch-not-for-the-strong-of-mind/feed/21911 Love from the Religion of Peacehttp://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/09/911-love-from-the-religion-of-peace/
Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:49:37 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=58888In case you missed it (which you probably did, since politically incorrect things like this aren't big in "mainstream" media circles), here are a few images from London on the tenth anniversary of the 911 terrorist attacks. While we're at it, let's look at a clip from last night's Tea Party GOP debate and become clear on why there is no way in Hades I would countenance Ron Paul as the Commander in Chief of our great nation. ]]>In case you missed it (which you probably did, since politically incorrect things like this aren’t big in “mainstream” media circles), here are a few images from London on the tenth anniversary of the 911 terrorist attacks.

Note the loving words and signs from adherents to the “Religion of Peace” and the sympathy they had for the nearly 3,000 Americans murdered on 911.

While we’re at it, why don’t you take a look at the second clip below from last night’s Tea Party GOP debate, and maybe you’ll have a better idea why there is no way in Hades I would countenance Ron Paul as the Commander in Chief of our great nation. This kind of enemy-loving garbage is simply inexcusable–from anyone, let alone a presidential candidate.

By the way, no rants from Paul-drones will be accepted in the comments area (and before you drones say it, no, I am not the government so I do not censor–this is my website and it will send the message I approve of). I simply have no time or inclination today for debunking anti-American prattle from people who are supposedly on the Right–ones who would have fit in quite well in the London protest.

]]>Mid East Misogyny and the Plight of Muslim Womenhttp://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/mid-east-misogyny-and-the-plight-of-muslim-women/
Sat, 02 Jul 2011 11:01:57 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=56442Elevating the rights of women in Muslim Countries is a cause that should galvanize Liberals and Conservatives, Christians, Jews, and American Muslims – indeed, anyone who is interested in equality and liberty and justice for all. The blessing of a free society is that our citizens are free to speak out on this issue even though our public officials can't find their voice. Is our love of gas-guzzling SUVs and our wrongheaded sense of "multicultural sensitivity" preventing us from giving this issue the attention it deserves?]]>

Ken Connor, Chairman, Center for a Just Society in Washington, DC

“[S]ome things must be said, and there are times when silence becomes an accomplice to injustice.” Ayaan Hirsi

In her best-selling autobiography, Infidel, Somali-born writer, politician, and activist Ayaan Hirsi catalogs a lifetime of grievances against the Muslim culture and religion. Throughout the book, Hirsi laments the West’s reticence to deal honestly with the egregious human rights abuses that routinely occur in the Muslim world, particularly against women.

No doubt when Hillary Clinton was appointed Secretary of State, women around the world were inspired and encouraged. Finally, an advocate for women’s rights in the most powerful diplomatic post on earth! Surely Mrs. Clinton would leverage her new position to catapult women’s issues to the forefront of the international human rights debate.

Yet, as Maureen Dowd points out in a recent article, Mrs. Clinton’s performance on international women’s rights has been disappointingly muted. As it happens, Hillary is constrained by the same strategic interests that have prevented the United States from taking a bold position on human rights abuses in the developing world for decades. This is particularly true in regard to our relations with Saudi Arabia, where a recent campaign to raise awareness of the Saudi ban on women driving (only one of a long list of offenses) went largely unnoticed.

The persistent “gender apartheid” that Dowd discusses in her article is no exaggeration. In many countries throughout the Middle East and beyond Muslim women are treated as second class citizens – mere chattels in a male dominated society. They are divorced with impunity, routinely abused, killed for breaches of honor, beaten for being in the company of men who are not their husbands, and in some cases subjected to excruciatingly painful and humiliating genital mutilation. The list of offenses and indignities goes on and on.

It is a curious irony that feminists in the United States haven’t taken up the cause of Muslim women. The all-female Liberal activist group Code Pink has time to organize a flotilla protesting Israel’s blockade of the West Bank, but no time to stand up for an entire population of women (some of them Palestinians, no doubt) whose most basic rights are denied on a daily basis. Why the silence? Why the complicity? Hirsi addresses the issue of western diffidence towards the plight of Muslim women in her writings:

“I cannot emphasize enough how wrongheaded this is. Withholding criticism and ignoring differences are racism in its purest form. Yet these cultural experts fail to notice that, through their anxious avoidance of criticizing non-Western countries, they trap the people who represent these cultures in a state of backwardness. The experts may have the best of intentions, but as we all know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

By “elevating cultures full of bigotry and hatred toward women to the stature of respectable alternative ways of life” and focusing instead on the advancement of abortion rights, gay marriage, and other pet causes of the liberated west, American feminists are guilty of gross hypocrisy. Their silence on the plight of Muslim women is truly deafening. So is the silence of Christians around the world, for that matter. The Church, which proclaims the sanctity and dignity of every human life, should be outraged about the plight of Muslim women in the Middle East. What better witness of Christ’s love could we offer than to take up the cause of those who yearn for the kind of freedom, grace, and redemption unique to Christianity?

The root cause of our diplomatic timidity on these issues is no surprise. We need the goodwill and cooperation of countries like Saudi Arabia because we need their oil. We are well aware that the House of Saud actively supports the subjugation of women, but we turn a blind eye to this injustice because “we have bigger fish to fry.” We have concluded that we can’t afford to alienate Middle Eastern misogynists, because the economic and political repercussions of doing so would be severe. The plight of Muslim women should be a cause that every person of goodwill and common sense can to get behind as a motivation for ending America’s dependence on foreign oil. Only when we’ve broken our addiction to Middle East petroleum does it appear that we will be free to speak out boldly against the plight of women in many of the world’s top oil-producing nations.

Elevating the rights of women in Muslim Countries is a cause that should galvanize Liberals and Conservatives, Christians, Jews, and American Muslims – indeed, anyone who is interested in equality and liberty and justice for all. The blessing of a free society is that our citizens are free to speak out on this issue even though our public officials can’t find their voice.

Is our love of gas-guzzling SUVs and our wrongheaded sense of “multicultural sensitivity” preventing us from giving this issue the attention it deserves? Only we know the answer to that question, and while we hedge and waffle, the cries of persecuted women in the Muslim world continue to ring out.

]]>Rep. West on America’s Security Interests in the Middle Easthttp://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/rep-west-on-americas-security-interests-in-the-middle-east/
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/rep-west-on-americas-security-interests-in-the-middle-east/#commentsFri, 01 Jul 2011 12:22:29 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=56424This video features Rep. Alan West (R-FL) at a Center for Security Policy event in New York City. West is a highly decorated and respected retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel, and he discusses U.S. security interests, primarily in the Middle East. He examines our military action in Libya and the "Arab Spring," among other topics.]]>

Rep. Allen West (R-FL)

This video features Rep. Allen West (R-FL) at a Center for Security Policy event in New York City. West is a highly decorated and respected retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel, and he discusses U.S. security interests, primarily in the Middle East.

As West points out, the military operation in Libya does not fit within the definition of allowable actions within the War Powers Act (in other words, there is no American interest at stake here).

It was on Day 91 of U.S. military action in Libya that West made this speech,

At first, the Obama Administration claimed this action did fit within the War Powers Act, then they changed their tune and made the outrageous claim that this wasn’t really a military action in a hostile environment. As West illustrated, this nonsensical claim reminds us of Bill Clinton’s parsing about what “is” is, and claiming that sex wasn’t sex.

We were supposedly there to protect innocent people…but the whole world is full of people who need protecting, and as West points out, you can’t really do that with an air-only campaign (I’m an Air Force veteran and I can tell you: the Air Force alone cannot accomplish such a mission). Again, there is no compelling American interest here.

We were supposedly there to take away Qadhafi’s military capability…but you can’t do that either with an air-only campaign. Again, there is no compelling American interest here.

We were supposedly there to remove Qadhafi from power…and now we’re starting to get into “mission creep.” But still, no compelling American interest here.

West also cuts through all the liberal euphoria over the so-called “Arab Spring.” He points out that merely removing one dictator does not mean freedom and prosperity are going to break out (as the removal of the shah of Iran illustrated). Since this “wonderful development,” we now have Iranian warships going through the Suez Canal, more rockets in Gaza, the Egyptians and Iranians are now talking together, the Coptic Christian community in Egypt is threatened by Muslim radicals, and more. The “Arab Spring” is not making things better, but more unstable and more radical.

No, the Muslim Brotherhood has been behind this unrest in the Middle East. They see a weak, appeasement-minded and pro-Muslim president in America, which means they see an opportunity to turn back what little progress, peace and normalization that has come to the Middle East in the last 40 years.

This video is about 35 minutes long, but it is well worth your time to watch it. In fact, it is important that you make time to watch it. The matters discussed by West affect the welfare and future of our country, as well as our precious military folks who fight for us. West is not only one of the best new congressmen elected in 2010, his is one of the best on Capitol Hill, period. America is blessed to have him in Washington D.C.

]]>http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/rep-west-on-americas-security-interests-in-the-middle-east/feed/6The Middle East One-State Planhttp://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/06/the-middle-east-one-state-plan/
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/06/the-middle-east-one-state-plan/#commentsFri, 03 Jun 2011 12:13:30 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=55464In the interest of continuing efforts to find peace, Andrew Klavan has an idea which could genuinely bring lasting peace to the Middle East region. It's a one-state solution where the entire Middle East is given to the Jews. This plan has a number of advantages including unprecedented religious freedom to the region.]]>As you may have seen in the headlines lately, President Barack Obama stepped in it by suggesting that Israel go back to their indefensible 1967 borders, which would make it easier for the Islamic extremists who surround Israel to annihilate that country.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu let it be known to President Obama and to the U.S. Congress that this was “not gonna happen,” a message which was received favorably in the United States by everyone except President Obama and a few other anti-Semites.

But in the interest of continuing efforts to find peace, Andrew Klavan has an idea which could genuinely bring lasting peace to the Middle East region. It’s a one-state solution where the entire Middle East is given to the Jews.

This plan has a number of advantages:

It would bring unprecedented religious freedom to the region

It would bring unprecedented freedom of all kinds to the region

It would bring unprecedented rights for women to the region

What do you say? Can we all get behind the Israeli One-State Plan?

]]>http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/06/the-middle-east-one-state-plan/feed/2Dakota Voice Week in Review, Ending May 28, 2011http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/dakota-voice-week-in-review-ending-may-28-2011/
Sun, 29 May 2011 13:30:46 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=55321The best of the best articles at Dakota Voice last week, including: Video: Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu Speech to Congress; Suicidal Britain Continues Absurd Ban of Michael Savage; Herman Cain: Don't Mess With Israel; When Radical Isn't Radical Enough; The Imperial Presidency of Barack Obama; Woe to You, Federal Fools!; Gov. Christie a Global Warming Disciple; and more!]]>These are the best of the best at Dakota Voice last week. These are the articles people came here eager to read. If you missed one the first time around, this is your chance to get caught up on the week’s most important happenings.

Video: Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu Speech to Congress – Courtesy of The Right Scoop, we have the video of today’s speech by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the United States Congress. Benjamin Netanyahu is one of my very favorite world leaders, and this speech demonstrates why: he refuses to appease evil, he refuses to compromise with evil, he is committed to freedom, and he understands the principles that can make any nation great if applied.

Suicidal Britain Continues Absurd Ban of Michael Savage – Do I also need to point out the sheer, mind-numbing lunacy of the British government here? Britain is run by suicidal, socialist leaders who have allowed their land and laws to be overrun by Islamists. They allow wild animal Muslims to throw frenzied temper tantrums in their streets and threaten the country with destruction and, hey! Thats A-OK! But, they will not tolerate a law-abiding American citizen who simply speaks about the danger we face from the radical Muslim maniacs who are hell-bent on destroying the West. They fear that if they now remove Dr. Savage from the list, the Muslims hordes in their country will blow a gasket and engage in unacceptable behaviours.

Herman Cain: Don’t Mess With Israel – Israel is one of America’s greatest friends and allies in the world. Not only is Israel the only stable democracy in the sea of oppression and repression that is the Middle East, Israel shares the same values as the United States. The nation of Israel has stood by the United States through thick and thin, and has even taken it on the chin for us more than once. GOP Presidential Candidate Herman Cain made clear what the “Cain Doctrine” would be: “You mess with Israel, you are messing with the United States of America.”

When Radical Isn’t Radical Enough – Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich recently attacked House Budget Chairman Paul Ryans Medicare proposals as imposing radical change from the right. Given our nation’s astronomical debt and deficit, Ryan’s proposals actually are not radical enough.

Herman Cain #1 on Zogby Poll – Though the “mainstream” media continues to do its best to pretend that Herman Cain doesn’t exist, the “atypical GOP candidate” continues to rise in popularity with the conservative base of the Republican Party. Today’s latest Zogby poll has Cain ahead of Christy by 3 points in the #1 spot. Despite his millions and his backing by the GOP establishment fatcats, Mitt “RomneyCare” Romney continues to lag behind in third place.

The Imperial Presidency of Barack Obama – Last Friday, May 20, was the deadline for a report to congress from President Barack Obama on his engagement of U.S. military forces in the Libyan civil war. That deadline passed without the report required by the War Powers Act, making this administration once again a group of lawbreakers. When the chief executive of a nation takes it upon himself to act without legal authority and without the required consent of other areas of government, we usually think of such actions as imperial in nature.

Woe to You, Federal Fools! – You may have heard the passage from Matthew 23:13-33 where Jesus was talking to the pompous, self-righteous leaders of his day. What might that sound like if it was updated to send an appropriate message to the pompous, self-indulgent leaders of our day? Thanks to Frank Turek, we know what it would sound like.

Herman Cain Brings Needed Lift to Republican Race – America needs a president who will help turn us back from this slide into the socialist abyss and help shrink the size of the federal government. On the issues, he sounds like one of us: securing our borders, enforcing immigration laws, guarding against the Islamic threat, exploiting our own energy resources, and lowering taxes. He is certainly a much-needed lift in the bleak field of Republican presidential candidates.

Gov. Christie a Global Warming Disciple – I received some very disappointing news yesterday. It has to do with New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, whom I’ve admired for some time. Though he is a straight-talking, no nonsense powerhouse for common sense and fiscal responsibility, apparently he supported a state-level cap and trade global warming tax, and believes in the hoax of anthropogenic global warming.

Government Regulations Don’t Make You Safer – The United States has three sectors of the economy suffering under regulatory red tape: financial services, energy and now health care. I’m certain the financial services regulations have caused more harm than good. Until voters recognize the unintended costs of regulations, politicians will continue to gain political capital by passing such feel-good legislation. Voters have to cultivate a mindset of freedom and deregulation rather than first thinking, “There ought to be a law.”

Thank you, faithful readers, for making these the best of the best!

]]>The Folly of Forsaking Our Friends in Israelhttp://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/the-folly-of-forsaking-our-friends-in-israel/
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/the-folly-of-forsaking-our-friends-in-israel/#commentsSat, 28 May 2011 11:04:29 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=55311Clearly, the Israel-Palestine conflict is not a simple issue, but the choice between alliance with radical anti-Semetic, anti-American factions and Israel should be an easy decision for the United States. There is nothing to be gained by forsaking our Jewish friends at this critical moment in time. Freedom and democracy will never thrive in the Middle East if America adopts an attitude of indifference towards the relentless campaign of terror being waged against the nation of Israel.]]>

Ken Connor, Chairman, Center for a Just Society in Washington, DC

“Israel has no better friend than America, and America has no better friend than Israel.” Benjamin Netanyahu

In a speech before a joint session of Congress this week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu affirmed what so many of us know to be true: Israel is the only true friend America has in the Middle East, and we should not take this friendship for granted. Yet this is exactly what it appears President Obama may be doing. After suggesting that renewed peace talks should begin with a return to the 1967 borders, Obama has spent the week attempting to clarify his words and mollify America’s Jewish population.

Caveats about “land swaps” notwithstanding, it’s unclear why the President would issue a statement so certain to rouse unease among our Jewish allies. If it was an ill-considered attempt at Arab appeasement, the President needs to get real. Aside from denying the legitimacy of the Jewish state and joining the Palestinians in their efforts to push Israel into the Mediterranean Sea, there can be no compromise with anti-Jewish forces in the Middle East. They are not interested in peace, and will never accept a two-state solution. This has been their position for more than sixty years.

Since President Truman became the first Head of State to recognize the Israel, America has been bound by a moral, ideological, and some might say theological commitment to the Jewish people. After witnessing the horrors of the Holocaust – the ghastly climax of centuries of unrelenting discrimination, persecution and ostracism in Europe and elsewhere – the United States came to recognize that the survivors of Hitler’s unspeakable terror should be allowed to reclaim a place for themselves in their ancestral homeland.

Credit: Ling Nut

Our support has been critical through the years, for without it, Israel truly stands alone and vulnerable, surrounded by antagonistic entities hell bent on her destruction. But America’s reasons for supporting Israel are not merely sentimental. For those that question the strategic wisdom of the United States continuing its support for Israel in these precarious diplomatic times, it should be acknowledged that no other nation in the region exemplifies western liberal ideals better than Israel. President Obama, like his predecessors before him, often speaks of the flame of freedom that burns within the heart of each person, and the universal right of mankind to exercise this freedom in societies governed by the rule of law. Where can you find such freedom in the Middle East but in Israel? Netanyahu made this point forcefully in his speech to Congress:

My friends, you don’t have to . . . do nation-building in Israel. We’re already built. You don’t need to export democracy to Israel. We’ve already got it. And you don’t need to send American troops to Israel. We defend ourselves. . . . This path of liberty is not paved by elections alone. It’s paved when governments permit protests in town squares, when limits are placed on the powers of rulers, when judges are beholden to laws and not men, and when human rights cannot be crushed by tribal loyalties or mob rule. Israel has always embraced this path in a Middle East that has long rejected it. In a region where women are stoned, gays are hanged, Christians are persecuted, Israel stands out. It is different.

Courageous Arab protesters are now struggling to secure these very same rights for their peoples, for their societies. We’re proud in Israel that over one million Arab citizens of Israel have been enjoying these rights for decades. Of the 300 million Arabs in the Middle East and North Africa, only Israel’s Arab citizens enjoy real democratic rights. Now, I want you to stop for a second and think about that. Of those 300 million Arabs, less than one-half of 1 percent are truly free and they’re all citizens of Israel. This startling fact reveals a basic truth: Israel is not what is wrong with about the Middle East; Israel is what is right about the Middle East. Israel fully supports the desire of Arab peoples in our region to live freely. We long for the day when Israel will be one of many real democracies in the region – in the Middle East.

Why President Obama would say or do anything to jeopardize the invaluable friendship that’s grown up between American and the Middle East’s only true democracy is perplexing. Again, if the reason lies in some ideologically-driven desire to appease volatile forces in Palestine, Syria, and Iran, then the President is guilty of grand naivete, for these entities will not be satisfied with anything less than Israel’s complete destruction.

Clearly, the Israel-Palestine conflict is not a simple issue, but the choice between alliance with radical anti-Semetic, anti-American factions and Israel should be an easy decision for the United States. There is nothing to be gained by forsaking our Jewish friends at this critical moment in time. Freedom and democracy will never thrive in the Middle East if America adopts an attitude of indifference towards the relentless campaign of terror being waged against the nation of Israel.

]]>http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/the-folly-of-forsaking-our-friends-in-israel/feed/3America: A Turncoat Nation?http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/america-a-turncoat-nation/
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/america-a-turncoat-nation/#commentsFri, 27 May 2011 18:47:16 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=55296Are we becoming a nation of turncoats? Not in the sense that we are becoming a nation of traitors, so much as it seems that as far as national policy goes, we are turning around and doing the opposite of what the United States has traditionally done. One such area has to do with Middle East policy and our support of our ally Israel. President Obama recently called for Israel to return to the indefensible 1967 borders.]]>

Are we becoming a nation of turncoats? Not in the sense that we are becoming a nation of traitors, so much as it seems that as far as national policy goes, we are turning around and doing the opposite of what the United States has traditionally done.

One such area has to do with Middle East policy and our support of our ally Israel. President Obama recently called for Israel to return to the indefensible 1967 borders, a move that would be suicidal for that small nation surrounded on every side by her enemies.

Fortunately, that didn’t go over very well in Israel or here in the United States (though there was probably cheering in terrorist cells around the world). Interestingly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to congress earlier this week was wildly popular, not only with those in congress who gave repeated standing ovations to Netanyahu, but also among the American people. The video I posted of PM Netanyahu’s address has been the most viewed article of the week.

Take a gander at Bill Whittle’s latest Firewall video in which he examines the disturbing reversals of American policy under Barack Obama. We the people of the United States must let Obama know that his radical values are not our values, and we expect him to project American values to the world, not the values of our enemies.

]]>http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/america-a-turncoat-nation/feed/7Anti-Semitism Back in Chic?http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/anti-semitism-back-in-chic/
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/anti-semitism-back-in-chic/#commentsThu, 26 May 2011 11:15:38 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=55216It's amazing the kind of despicable behavior you can get away with, if you just couch it in the right terms or follow in the footsteps of the "right people" when doing so. Some would say President Obama is making it fashionable once again to show disrespect for the Jewish people and put lipstick on the pig of anti-semitism.]]>It’s amazing the kind of despicable behavior you can get away with, if you just couch it in the right terms or follow in the footsteps of the “right people” when doing so.

It has become apparent over and over and over during the past two years of Barack Obama’s presidency that he has a distinct affection for things Islamic. The deference he has given to Islamic holidays, Islamic figures and Islamic consideration are hard for the objective and observant mind to miss. Indeed, before America even elected him to the presidency, he told us that he thought the Muslim call to prayer was “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”

Though President Obama’s recent insistence that Israel adopt the unsustainable 1967 borders is perhaps the most outrageous swipe Obama has taken against Israel, it is not the first. The last time Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu came to America, Obama treated him like…well, like he should have treated his terrorist friends. His insistence that Israel go soft on terrorism has already led to the deaths of innocent civilians in Israel.

So when President Obama undermines the Jewish nation of Israel publicly, that can have indirect effects as well as the obvious and direct ones.

Remember what peer pressure was like in high school? Remember how some people seemed compelled to behave badly because they saw the popular kid(s) behaving that way? Maybe you felt that pressure and even gave in to it. The human compulsion for societal connection and bonding can be very strong, and it often leads many people to do horrible things they might not otherwise do on their own. In some cases, they might have been tempted to do something bad, but lacked the courage to do so on their own; seeing someone else–especially someone popular or powerful–do the thing they’ve been tempted to do is all they need to cross the line into action.

So has Barack Obama’s contemptuous behavior toward the Jewish state of Israel led to more open anti-Semitism? My friend Shad Olson of the Shad Olson Show has been pondering these issues lately, and he seems to think so.

Below you will find a video version of his radio talk show in which he talks to Kitty Werthmann, someone who grew up in the shadow of the worlds most notorious Jew-hater, Adolf Hitler.

Werthmann, who currently lives in Pierre, South Dakota and heads South Dakota Eagle Forum, grew up in Nazi-controlled Austria and saw the evil that can come out into the open under the sway of a popular leader.

She makes no bones about how she sees Obama’s good treatment of Israel’s enemies and bad treatment of Israel, stating, “What Hitler couldn’t finish, that is what Barack Obama is doing now.”

Werthmann goes on in the interview to talk about the shared goals and stated sympathies between Muslim elements in the Middle East and Hitler’s anti-semitism in Germany in the 1930s.

Shad has also written an article on his website about some anti-semitism from the Right. His article is entitled “Why Libertarians Love Obama on Israel.”

While perhaps most anti-semitism comes from the Left, especially in the form of support of terrorists and Muslim radicals who want to annihilate Israel, Shad says there is some anti-semitism on the Right as well. Shad uses the terms “libertarian” and “conservative” somewhat interchangeably in his article, but I would point out that while there are some areas of agreement between libertarianism and conservatism, they are definitely not the same philosophy.

I’ve seen more than a little of what Shad is talking about, typically from libertarian-minded folk. I wouldn’t want to say that all libertarians don’t have much use for Israel, but the only ideological quarter (other than the terrorist-loving Left) from which I’m hearing anti-Israel sentiments is from the libertarian quarter.

A host of Ron Paul supporters seem to absolutely loathe Israel, and while I can’t think of any directly anti-semitic comments from Ron Paul himself, I’ve noticed an unmistakable coolness from Ron Paul toward the Jewish state and even the sentiment of American support for Israel. I have a number of libertarian friends and we work together where possible in the area of returning our federal government to its constitutional limits. I can’t think of any of them who have made these kinds of statements, but many of them support Ron Paul for president, and I would ask them to seriously consider his “coolness” toward Israel in light of the vicious threats our only reliable ally in the Middle East faces.

As Shad points out, the new anti-semitism has been cleaned up and made more chic. The pig of anti-semitism is now dressed up in the lipstick and perfume of “anti-Zionism” and opposition to “Jewish bankers,” appeasement language and even some who attempt to justify their loathing of Jews by twisting the Bible.

Let me be clear. The serious student of the Bible cannot escape the fact that the Jews are and remain God’s chosen people. Yes, the bulk of the Jewish nation refused their Messiah 2,000 years ago, but God has always kept his side of the covenant, even when Israel has violated it over and over. He is not done with the nation and people of Israel, and the Bible is clear on this subject. As Shad pointed out in his article, you don’t want to be on the wrong side of the blessings and curses God has pronounced over his people Israel. Anyone who attempts to cloak anti-semitism with pages of the Bible is either not a Christian, or a very deluded and ignorant one.

Let me also be clear on something else. The ideology and philosophy of conservatism has no place or quarter for anti-semitism. Conservatism sees all men as created equal by their Creator. Conservatism places value on a person’s principles and integrity, not their skin color or ethnic heritage. I’m not a libertarian, but I dare say that serious libertarians might even say the same of their own ideology–but that is for them to articulate, not me as an outsider. But I can tell you that someone who calls himself a conservative and at the same time bears animosity toward the Jewish people or toward the one island of freedom and democracy in the Middle East, Israel, is either no conservative, or a very ignorant and deluded one.

Barack Obama may choose to thumb his nose at Israel, and he may choose to make it more difficult for them to maintain the safety of their people. You may even choose to emulate or join him in this.

But this is one conservative Christian American who stands firmly and unshakably with the Jewish people and the nation of Israel.

]]>http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/anti-semitism-back-in-chic/feed/17Key Facts About Israel’s Bordershttp://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/key-facts-about-israels-borders/
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/key-facts-about-israels-borders/#commentsWed, 25 May 2011 11:00:45 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=55192It's quite possible that there are a lot of people out there who don't realize the gravity of the threats faced by Israel, and why President Barack Obama's call for Israel to retreat to the 1967 border is so unacceptable. This short video from the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs provides an excellent overview of why Israel needs, at a minimum, the borders she has now. Anything less leaves Israel wide open to attack from multiple directions, and history teaches that those avenues will be exploited if left exposed. ]]>It’s quite possible that there are a lot of people out there who don’t realize the gravity of the threats faced by Israel, and why President Barack Obama’s call for Israel to retreat to the 1967 border is so unacceptable.

We in the United States have enjoyed tremendous peace and security due to our geographical distance from our enemies. Israel is surrounded on every side by nations and groups that have sworn to see her erased from the planet. The borders of the United States are huge, we have oceans on two of our four sides, and the bulk of our land is hundreds if not thousands of miles from our borders. Some parts of Israel are only a few miles wide, and modern weaponry can pound the majority of Israel from the borders.

The terrorist acts of 911 were particularly shocking to us because we aren’t used to being vulnerable in our own homeland. The Israelis, on the other hand, are vulnerable every day, as a part of life.

The original UN plan for Israel in 1948 also created a Palestinian state. However, like everything the UN does, it was a complete goat-rope and a royal mess. The borders for both states made no sense and were completely untenable. None of that was good enough for the Palestinians or the neighboring Arab nations anyway, so they proceeded to wipe out Israel from the beginning.

Unfortunately for them, as they would learn over several years and several attempts to wipe Israel off the map, Israel was a lot stronger than they realized. Every attempt they made to annihilate the Jewish nation ended with Israel gaining more and more territory–something common through thousands of years of warfare, and quite reasonable since the ancestral homeland of Israel had been much larger than the UN plan to begin with.

This short video from the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs provides an excellent overview of why Israel needs, at a minimum, the borders she has now. Anything less leaves Israel wide open to attack from multiple directions, and history teaches that those avenues will be exploited if left exposed.

Of course, many people already understand these vulnerabilities…and just don’t care. President Barack Obama is one such person. With the information and intelligence resources of the United States, there is simply no way he could possibly fail to understand the circumstances here; indeed, even the average citizen who took half an hour to educate themselves could grasp this. There are simply some people who are more sympathetic to the terrorists and Islamic radicals who want to wipe Israel off the map, than they are with the shining beacon of democracy and freedom in the Middle East known as Israel.

Hopefully you are not such a person. Hopefully you will walk away from this short film with a better understanding of the situation in the Middle East than you had before, and hopefully you will get behind our ally Israel to support her defense against those who would destroy her.

]]>http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/key-facts-about-israels-borders/feed/4Video: Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu Speech to Congresshttp://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/video-israeli-pm-benjamin-netanyahu-speech-to-congress/
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/video-israeli-pm-benjamin-netanyahu-speech-to-congress/#commentsTue, 24 May 2011 18:32:06 +0000http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=55170Courtesy of The Right Scoop, we have the video of today's speech by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the United States Congress. Benjamin Netanyahu is one of my very favorite world leaders, and this speech demonstrates why: he refuses to appease evil, he refuses to compromise with evil, he is committed to freedom, and he understands the principles that can make any nation great if applied.]]>

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

Courtesy of The Right Scoop, we have the video of today’s speech by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the United States Congress.

Benjamin Netanyahu is one of my very favorite world leaders, and this speech demonstrates why: he refuses to appease evil, he refuses to compromise with evil, he is committed to freedom, and he understands the principles that can make any nation great if applied.